This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
The Iberian Turn: an overview on Iberian Studies in the United States Esther Gimeno Ugalde Topic: The current state and future development of the discipline of Iberian Studies in the U.S.
Abstract: The objective of this report is to examine the current state of the discipline of Iberian Studies in the United States and consider the challenges facing this emerging field in an institutional context that is largely dominated by national, monolingual traditions. Following in Chandler’s footsteps, the report offers a comprehensive overview of the various institutional frameworks in which Iberian Studies is mediated in the US and the intellectual practices that influence its configuration. Keywords: Iberian Studies, Iberian turn, Iberian Peninsula, Iberian space, Iberian cultures, Iberian literatures, literary polysystem
The consolidation of Iberian Studies as an academic field must be considered
within the context of recent supranational realignments in Area Studies and in
disciplines within Comparative Literature, such European literature and World
literature1, which Pérez Isasi views as symptoms of the inadequacy of national
literary models to explain the complexity of literary phenomena (2017: 347). In
the United States’ case, it is also important to acknowledge the influence of
poststructuralism and Cultural studies, as well as the crisis in Hispanism, and
Peninsular Hispanism2 specifically, which has led to a re-conceptualization of the
study of the Peninsula’s literatures and cultures (cf. Newcomb 2015; Pérez Isasi
2017).
Iberian Studies, as Santana has pointed out (2008: 42 and 2013: 54), does not
merely expand Peninsular Hispanism’s focus to include new authors or topics of
analysis in the canon3; rather, it represents an alternative paradigm that
reformulates the field’s theoretical and methodological framework as much as its
object of study. In this way, Iberian Studies’ point of departure is the relational
1 See Marta Puxan-Oliva’s report “Frictions of World Literature” (2016). 2 The term Peninsular Hispanism is taken from Resina (2005: 172). Though this is not the appropriate venue for a detailed discussion, it is worth mentioning the widespread misuse of the term Peninsular studies (or Peninsularism) in US academia, which is generally used to refer almost exclusively to the study of the literatures and cultures of the Spanish territory, leaving neighboring Portugal aside. 3 Winston R. Groman’s 2016 report on the Hispanic literary canon in US universities is a thoroughly worthwhile read on this topic. Without forgetting that subjectivity plays a key role in the formation of any literary canon, the report offers interesting facts about the representation of Spanish authors in US academia. A similar study focusing on Iberian authors would be enormously useful to trace a more detailed map of Iberian Studies in the US and to determine the extent to which universities that house Iberian Studies departments or programs have adopted the epistemological shift proposed by the most prominent voices in the field, as opposed to using the field’s name merely because it is currently in vogue.
study of Iberian cultures and literatures, and it distances itself from any single
monolingual perspective or national context (Pérez 2016: 266). This paradigm
opens up new polycentric perspectives that encompass aspects of literature,
culture, and language that have historically been relegated to marginal positions.
To cite Olaziregi, the discipline of Iberian Studies “rigorously analyzes the
relationships, convergences, tensions, exchanges, dependencies”4 between the
Peninsula’s diverse literatures and cultures5 (2015: 540).
It is worth noting that, as it establishes itself as new discipline, Iberian
Studies—and particularly its Anglo-Saxon tradition—will need to move beyond the
presentism that Cultural studies has so often been accused of. This criticism is
not unfounded, as Cultural studies has almost exclusively limited itself to the
analysis of contemporary periods (Delgado 2013: 48). Iberian Studies
encompasses a broader range of currently relevant topics than could possibly be
enumerated here: the origins of Catalan Iberianism (cf. Martínez-Gil 1997),
Fernando Pessoa’s relationships with Spanish writers and intellectuals (cf. Sáez
Delgado 2015), Miguel de Unamuno’s admiration for Portuguese culture and his
influence on Portuguese authors such as Miguel Torga (cf. Newcomb 2012), the
multifaceted modernist Almada Negreiros’s time in Madrid and his relations with
Spain’s cultural luminaries (cf. Sáez Delgado/Soares 2016), the multilingual and
4 “[…] analiza rigurosamente las relaciones, convergencias, tensiones, intercambios, dependencias […].” 5 In her original text, Olaziregi only mentions literature, but for the purposes of this study, Iberian cultures have also been included. As seen below, Iberian Studies is understood here in the broad sense put forth by Jorge Pérez (2016).
alternative to Peninsular Hispanism, but also as a kind of starting point for the
field in the United States.6
Though it is difficult to refute Resina’s foundational premises, it is possible to add
nuance to them. For one thing, his book was preceded by a number of
publications—including several by scholars in the US—that questioned the
contemporary model of Peninsular Hispanism and advocated for an academic
approach to the Iberian space that was less tied the Spanish state (in keeping
with the country’s own constitution, which has recognized Spain as a multilingual
country since the end of the ‘70s), and non-hierarchical in focus. Co-authored
volumes such as Spain Beyond Spain: Modernity, Literary History, and National
Identity (edited by Epps and Cifuentes) and Ideologies of Hispanism (edited by
Moraña), both published in 2005,7 as well as articles by Sebastiaan Faber (2008)
and Mario Santana (2008), among others, speak to an interest in revamping the
traditional, hegemonic fundaments of Hispanism in the US. For instance, even
though Santana did not explicitly label his article as belonging to Iberian Studies,
the paradigm shift he was proposing has much in common with what is today
known as Iberian Studies, both in terms of theory and methodology. In “El
hispanismo en los Estados Unidos y la ‘España plural,’” he summed up his
contribution in these words:
6 More detailed studies related to Resina’s proposal include articles by Gabilondo (2013-2014) and Pérez Isasi (2017). 7 The latter has a broader focus, which also includes critical reflections about Latin America. In spite of the fact that it was a later publication (2010), it is also worth mentioning the volume New Spain, New Literatures, which was edited by Martín-Estrudillo and Spadaccini.
This paper examines how these processes and debates have promoted a
revision, and even a reconfiguration, of North American Hispanism’s institutional
life, and proposes to transform the study of Peninsular literature (which has
traditionally been centered on Spanish-language works) into a broader discipline
that would prioritize the study of inter-literary relations and the internal
complexity of the Iberian Peninsula’s multilingual culture.8 (Santana 2008: 33)
On the other hand, even if it is certain that Resina’s 2009 proposal represents
the most developed theoretical formulation of Iberian Studies in US academia to
date (and likely beyond that context as well), the practical implementation of what
is today known as Iberian Studies has a long trajectory in universities in the
United States.
In a 2016 essay, Silvia Bermúdez highlighted the pioneering efforts of the
Department of Spanish and Portuguese at the University of California-Santa
Barbara (UCSB) to search for ways to reconfigure the analytical approaches to the
Iberian space. This department was one of the first in the US to include the study
of all five of the Iberian Peninsula’s official languages and their respective
literatures in its course offerings. As examples of the department’s seminal
8 “Este ensayo examina cómo estos procesos y debates han promovido la revisión e incluso la reconfiguración de la vida institucional del hispanismo norteamericano, y propone una transformación del estudio de la literatura peninsular (centrado tradicionalmente en la producción en lengua castellana) en una disciplina más amplia que tenga como objeto prioritario las relaciones interliterarias y la complejidad interna de la cultura multilingüe de la Península Ibérica.”
achievements, Bermúdez offers up the establishment of the Center of Portuguese
Studies in 1979, the launch of the first Catalan language course in 1988-89, the
establishment of the Joxemiel Barandiaran Chair of Basque Studies in 1993, and
the Center for Galician Studies (which existed from 2000-07 under the direction
of Harvey Sharrer). She argues that:
[…] any inclusive account of this history [of Iberian Studies] must recognize the
role of the Department of Spanish and Portuguese at UCSB as a forerunner in the
implementation and development of the field. It is a question of recognizing that
my department has participated, since the end of the 20th century, in the
practical and theoretical reconfiguration of the modes of representation and
interpretation of the Iberian space in both pedagogy and research in North
American academia through the implementation of courses and projects that
acknowledge the cultural, linguistic, and national complexity of the Peninsula’s
geopolitical space.9 (Bermúdez 2016: 24)
Another addition to Bérmudez 2016 list of Iberian Studies milestones at UCSB,
would be the Center for Catalan Studies (CCS), a collaboration between UCSB and
the Universitat d’Alacant (http://www.cativitra.ucsb.edu/) that was launched in
9 “[…] cualquier relato inclusivo de dicha historia debe registrar el precursor papel del Departamento de Español y Portugués de la Universidad de California-Santa Bárbara en la implementación y desarrollo de dichos estudios. Se trata de reconocer que junto a las reflexiones teóricas, ha sido desde la praxis como mi departamento participa, desde finales del siglo XX, en la reconfiguración de los modelos representativos e interpretativos en la enseñanza y en la investigación académica norteamericana con la implementación de cursos y proyectos que reconocen la complejidad cultural, lingüística, y nacional del espacio geopolítico conocido como la Península Ibérica.”
2017. Along similar lines, the Department of Hispanic and Luso-Brazilian
Literatures at the City University of New York (CUNY) Graduate Center has for
decades been a leader in the study and teaching of Iberian languages, literatures,
and cultures. CUNY hosts a Center for Galician Studies—established in 1988 and
later renamed the Xoán González Millán Center in Galician Studies, in honor of
the late professor who coordinated the original chair in collaboration with
Galicia’s Secretaría Xeral de Política Lingüística (Rei-Doval 2016: 6-7)—and the
more recently established Mercè Rodoreda Chair (established in cooperation with
the Institut Ramon Llull in 2003) and Bernardo Atxaga Chair in Basque Literature
and Linguistics (established in cooperation with the Etxepare Euskal Institutua in
2011)10. The list of renowned literary specialists and linguists who have passed
through the department—including Enric Bou, Anxo Lorenzo, Henrique
Monteagudo, and Dolores Vilavedra, as well as writers of the caliber of Bernardo
Atxaga, Kirmen Uribe, Manuel Rivas and Teresa Moure, among others—offers
irrefutable proof of the department’s Iberian focus11. Nevertheless, in the effort to
have a more precise cartography of Iberian Studies in the United States and trace
10 Stanford and the University of Chicago also have Chairs in Catalan studies, established in 2005-06 and 2007-08 respectively. Chairs in Basque Studies currently exist at the University of Nevada-Reno, the University of Chicago, Boise State University, and the University of Massachusetts-Amherst. CUNY’s Chair of Galician Studies, which is directed by José de Valle, is currently the only such visiting professor position in the United States, though the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee’s Galician Studies Research Group is worth mentioning here. Formed in 2014, the group is currently one of the epicenters of Galician studies in the United States. More information about Galician studies in the US can be found in Rei-Doval’s report (2016). 11 Basque Studies have a long history in the US. As early as 1967, the William Douglass Center for Basque Studies was founded at the University of Nevada-Reno. Today, the Center has three permanent positions and a vacant assistant professorship. Boise State University also has five faculty members in its Basque Studies Program, and both institutions offer a minor in Basque studies. Furthermore, Basque lecturerships or TA positions exist at UCSB, the University of Chicago, the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, UCLA, and Boise State. See http://www.etxepare.eus/es/universidades-mapa for more information.
12 UMass-Amherst has offered a minor in Catalan studies since the 2014-15 academic year (https://www.umass.edu/spanport/catalan-minor). 13 With Ângela Fernandes and Santiago Pérez Isasi (University of Lisbon), Robert Newcomb (UC Davis) is preparing a special issue about Iberian Studies, entitled “Iberian Studies: New Spaces of Inquiry,” which is forthcoming in the International Journal of Iberian Studies (IJIS) in 2018. 14 On a different note, Gabilondo’s contribution (2013-2014) is also worthy of mention. He submits the field to harsh criticism, arguing that it is a product of Spain’s excessive nationalism and a reincarnation of Hispanism.
Among these voices are some who have called attention to the challenges
involved in implementing Iberian Studies (Santana 2013; Bermúdez 2016), which
be discussed further below. Others, like Jorge Pérez’s 2016 paper, have even
sounded the alarm about the establishment of new epistemological hierarchies
that, in the effort to recover lost academic prestige, end up privileging the study
of literature over other manifestations such as cinema or other cultural artifacts.
Pérez’s proposal emphasizes the benefits of broadening the cultural archive
beyond literary texts to make room for the visual arts, television, and cinema,
among other forms of cultural production. In his view, a broader archive would
help the discipline generate professional attachment, i.e. the sense of belonging
necessary to find the appropriate niche within the institutional context that
surrounds it. In this sense, Pérez reminds his readers that many researchers in
the United States include in their academic work the analysis of a cultural archive
that is not limited to literary forms of expression, and that “if we are trying to
reconfigure the field, we cannot conceptualize it around literature alone and
assume that we will later be able to broaden the archive by adapting the same
methodology to other cultural objects and considering them only a posteriori”
(2016: 279, my translation)15.
15 “[S]i pretendemos reconfigurar, no podemos conceptualizarlo sobre la base única de la literatura, y asumir que más adelante podemos ampliar el archivo adaptando la misma metodología a otros productos culturales que son considerados solo a posteriori”.
In spite of the deliberately political nature of Resina’s proposals (2009)16—which
is absent in Santana (2008) and Bermúdez (2016) and has also been criticized
by other researchers (Gabilondo 2013-2014; Pérez Isasi 2017)—it does not seem
misguided to trace a line of continuity between most of the proposals mentioned
here, as they all define the “Iberian turn” first and foremost as an epistemological
shift.
The Institutionalization of Iberian Studies in the US
In order to better understand the current state and future prospects and
challenges of the field, it is necessary to examine the US institutional frameworks
in which Iberian Studies is now being developed as a discipline that—like every
supranational approach—must compete with dominant models that focus on
national literatures, on both an organizational and ideological level (Pérez Isasi
2017: 348).
Although discourse about the crisis of Hispanism (and particularly Peninsular
Hispanism) in the United States was common in the first few years of the 21st
century, the last decade has witnessed the gradual institutionalization of Iberian
16 In Resina’s own words: “What I am proposing is evidently a political agenda, or more precisely, an epistemological project without any pretensions of political impartiality” (2009: 92, my translation).
Studies. A similar phenomenon has occurred in the European context,17 albeit
with notable differences.
During this period of major transitions, more than a few units that focus on
Spanish and/or Portuguese languages and cultures have adopted broader
denominations in recent years, such as Iberian Studies or Latin American studies,
offering programs of study at both the graduate and undergraduate level that tie
those denominations together (Santana 2013: 55). Some notable examples
include Ohio State University’s Iberian Studies Program; the University of Notre
Dame’s Iberian and Latin American Studies program; New York University’s
Iberian Studies program; the Latin American, Caribbean, and Iberian Studies
Program (LACIS) at the University of Wisconsin-Madison; the program in Iberian
and Latin American Literatures and Cultures at the University of Texas-Austin; and
the Latin American and Iberian Studies program at Bard, all of which are either
housed within departments of Spanish and Portuguese or departments of
Romance Languages and Literatures or offered as interdisciplinary programs
within their respective universities.
Along with these changes in nomenclature, there has been an observable effort
to offer courses—generally for undergraduates—that reflect the Peninsula’s
17 In a recent published article (2017), Pérez Isasi offers an excellent overview of Iberian Studies’ Anglo-Saxon and European traditions, in which he also highlights the gradual institutionalization of the field in Europe.
responding to matters of style and trends or, as Santana himself suggested, an
interest in distancing themselves from the image of simple “service” units or
“language-teaching” departments in order to establish an alternative basis for
legitimacy and intellectual prestige. Additionally, it will be essential to consider
the extent to which it will be possible to implement the institutional changes—
both structural and ideological—needed to achieve complete institutionalization
for Iberian Studies within US academia.
Among the intellectual practices that are contributing to the field’s establishment
in the United States, it is worth emphasizing a string of recent symposiums and
colloquiums: at Stanford (2011), at Ohio State University (2013), and the
colloquiums organized by the UC Comparative Iberian Studies Working Group,
which have met every May since 2011 at the University of California (Newcomb
2015: 196 and 2017).20 No less important is the integration of panels with
Iberian scope into the annual Modern Language Association (MLA) conventions. A
quick review of the programs of these conventions between 2004 and 2017 is
enough to illustrate the increasing interest in Iberian Studies across several
distinct perspectives and time periods.21 At the 2015-17 triennial alone, a total of
20 There have also been a significant number of recent symposia in Europe: the international seminars “Looking at Iberia from a Comparative European Perspective: Literature, Narration, and Identity” (2011) and “Iberian Studies: New Spaces” (2016), both organized by the University of Lisbon (Portugal); and the two Iberian Cultural Studies Conferences in Germany (the first took place at Philipps-Marburg University in 2014 and the second at Chemnitz Technical University in 2017). A third conference is slated to take place at the University of Bamberg. 21 Source: https://apps.mla.org/conv_listings?msg=syn [Consulted in June 2017]. Along the lines of the above comments, an exhaustive analysis of these proposals and the comparative nature of these initiatives remains to be undertaken.
Equally worthy of mention is the establishment of work groups and research
groups at different universities, which offers clear evidence of an effort to
advance and institutionalize the field. One might reference, for example, the
Midwest Iberian Studies Group (https://huminst.osu.edu/iberian-studies), the
University of California Comparative Iberian Studies Working Group
(https://uchri.org/awardees/comparative-iberian-studies/ (co-directed by Silvia
Bermúdez and Robert Newcomb), and the Iberian Studies Initiative at the
University of Minnesota (http://iberianstudies.umn.edu/). Even though all of
these advances contribute, without doubt, to the generation of a sense of
belonging within the discipline (Chandler 2009), it is only fair to acknowledge that
the creation of a wider network would be helpful both in promoting the field and
in implementing it in institutional contexts that are largely dominated by national
traditions22. It is precisely this need that the IStReS project (Iberian Studies
Reference Site, http://istres.letras.ulisboa.pt/) intends to meet. A collaboration
22 Although, in the British context specifically, it is worth mentioning the pioneering work of the Association of Contemporary Iberian Studies, which was founded in 1978 and is closer in its focus to Area studies (Pérez Isasi 2017: 348).
between Boston College (PI: Esther Gimeno Ugalde) and the Universidade de
Lisboa (PI: Santiago Pérez-Isasi), the project aims to contribute to the visibility of
Iberian Studies by offering a relational database that compiles and systematizes
an international corpus of academic work from the last two decades in the field of
Iberian Studies. The website includes a directory of the most relevant researchers
in the field on both sides of the Atlantic. The project was officially launched in fall
2017 at various academic conferences23.
Santana (2013) and Bermúdez (2016) have offered relevant reflections on the
challenges of implementing Iberian Studies at US universities. In Bermúdez’s
interesting summary of the pioneering role played by UCSB’s Department of
Spanish and Portuguese in the development of what is today known as Iberian
Studies, she notes that practical experience (rather than theory) has taught her
department that many of the difficulties involved in implementing programs
focused on Spain’s languages and cultures do not have to do with
administrations and/or departments within US academia but with the
governments of Spain’s Autonomous Communities. She argues that universities
in the United States ought to search for alternative ways to finance themselves
that do not depend exclusively on institutions within Spain’s Autonomous
Communities. To illustrate this point, she summons the failed attempt to institute
23 The 39th Annual ACIS Conference (September 4-6, 2017, University of East Anglia, Norwich, England); the III Congreso de Humanidades Digitales Hispánicas (October 18-20, 2017, Universidad de Málaga, Spain); and the Second Iberian Cultural Studies Conference (November 16-18, 2017, Chemnitz Technical University, Germany).
languages, cultures, and literatures “uncomfortably visible”24. Definitively, it is a
question of whether or not the new configuration will promote new visibilities that
ultimately end up subordinating other areas of study to lower positions that they
will find uncomfortable.
Along this line of thought, another major challenge that Iberian Studies must
confront is the need to create communal spaces where it can interact with other
disciplines on grounds that are not necessarily comparative. Particularly relevant
will be the discipline’s relations with Hispanic, Portuguese, Basque, Catalan, and
Galician studies and its ability to respect them as their own disciplines. With
regards to Catalan studies specifically, Fernàndez and Martí-López (2005: 12)
have pointed out the challenge of establishing intellectual dialogues with other
disciplines and re-envisioning their relationships with the new field of Iberian
Studies. Olaziregi and Arana Cobos (2016: 1056-1057), for instance, maintain
that international interest in Basque studies has benefitted to a certain extent
from the overhaul of traditional Hispanism and the gradual establishment of the
new paradigm. Even though the premises of these two essays differ from the
premises of this one, since they are focused on Catalan and Basque studies
respectively, all three proposals emphasize the importance of dialogue between
these fields.
24 The term “uncomfortable visibility” is borrowed from Fernàndez and Martí-López (2005: 10), who have used it to refer to the newfound visibility of Catalan studies in modern language departments in the United Kingdom.
In spite of all the advances that demonstrate Iberian Studies’ emergence and its
gradual institutionalization in the academia, both in North America and Europe,
the need for continual reflection by and about the discipline remains evident. It
will also be essential to explore Iberian Studies’ potential through fruitful
intersections with other established or emerging fields (Translation studies,
Genre studies, Queer studies, Trans-Atlantic studies, Migration and Diaspora
studies, Digital humanities, etc.). And logically, it will also be necessary to create
collaborative networks among institutions and researchers to promote the field
and overcome “the conceptual and practical difficulties of implementing Iberian
Studies in institutional contexts predefined by national traditions” (Resina 2013:
vii). All of this indicates, as Pérez Isasi has already suggested (2017: 361), that
there is still along road ahead of us in the coming years.
References Abreu, Maria Fernanda de (1997). Cervantes no Romantismo Português.
Cavaleiros andantes, manuscritos encontrados e gargalhadas moralíssimas. Lisboa: Editorial Estampa.
Álvarez, Marta, and Esther Gimeno Ugalde (eds.) (in press). “Paisajes de la crisis
en los cines ibéricos.” Iberoamericana. AMERICA LATINA – ESPAÑA – PORTUGAL.
Arnau i Segarra, Pilar, et al. (eds.) (2002). Escribir entre dos lenguas. Escritores
catalanes y la elección de la lengua literaria. Escriure entre dues llengües. Escriptors catalans i l’elecció de la llengua literària. Kassel: Reichenberger.
Bermúdez, Silvia (2016). “Estudios Ibéricos: Reconfigurar modelos representativos e interpretativos en la enseñanza y en la investigación académica norteamericana.” ALEC, 41(4): 21-34.
Bueno Maia, Rita (2012). De como o pícaro chegou a Portugal e aí se
apresentou: contributo para a história da recepção do romance picaresco espanhol em Portugal. PhD thesis defended at the University of Lisbon (Portugal).
Buffery, Helena, Stuart Davis, and Kirsty Hooper (eds.) (2007). Reading Iberia:
Theory / History / Identity. Oxford: Peter Lang. Cabo, Fernando, Anxo Abuín, and César Domínguez (eds.) (2016). A Comparative
History of Literatures in the Iberian Peninsula, 2. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Chandler, James (2009). “Introduction: Doctrines, Disciplines, Discourses,
Departments.” Critical Inquiry, 35(4): 729-746. Dasilva, Xosé Manuel (2013). Estudios sobre la autotraducción en el espacio
ibérico. Bern: Peter Lang. Delgado, Luisa Elena (2013). “If We Build It, Will They Come? Iberian Studies as a
Field of Dreams.” In Joan Ramon Resina (ed.), Iberian Modalites. A Relational Approach to the Study of Culture in the Iberian Peninsula (pp. 37-53). Liverpool: Liverpool UP.
Epps, Brad, and Luis Fernández Cifuentes (eds.) (2005). Spain Beyond Spain:
Modernity, Literary History, and National Identity. Lewisburg: Bucknell UP. Faber, Sebastiaan (2008). “Economies of Prestige: The Place of Iberian Studies in
the American University.” Hispanic Research Journal, 9(1): 7-32. Faber, Sebastiaan (2017). “Beyond the nation: Spanish Civil War exile and the
problem of Iberian cultural history.” In Javier Muñoz-Basols, et al. (eds.), The Routledge Companion to Iberian Studies (pp. 427-438). Oxford: Routledge.
Fernàndez, Josep-Anton, and Elisa Martí-López (2005). “Introduction: New
Directions for Catalan Studies.” Catalan Review, Vol. XIX: 9-15.
Gabilondo, Joseba (2013-2014). “Spanish Nationalist Excess: A Decolonial and
Postnational Critique of Iberian Studies.” Prosopopeya, (8): 23-60. Groman, Winston R. (2016). “El canon literario hispánico en las universidades
estadounidenses.” Informes del Observatorio / Observatorio Reports, 026(12). doi: 10.15427/OR026-12/2016SP
Martínez-Gil, Víctor (1997). El naixement de l’Iberisme catalanista. Barcelona:
Curial. Moraña, Mabel (ed.) (2005). Ideologies of Hispanism. Nashville: Vanderbilt UP. Muñoz-Basols, Javier, Manuel Delgado Morales, and Laura Lonsdale (eds.)
(2017). Routledge Companion to Iberian Studies. Oxford: Routledge. Newcomb, Robert P (2012). “Iberian Anguish: Unamuno’s Influence on Miguel
Torga.” Luso-Brazilian Review, 49(2): 188-206. Newcomb, Robert P (2015). “Theorizing Iberian Studies.” Hispania, 98(2): 196-
197. Newcomb, Robert P (2017). Electronic correspondence with the author. Olaziregi, Mari Jose (2015). “La internacionalización de la literatura vasca.” In
Pello Salaburu, Beatriz Fernández, and Ibon Sarasola (eds.), Ibon Sarasola, gorazarre: homenatge, homenaje (pp. 531-544). Bilbao: Universidad del País Vasco.
Olaziregi, Mari Jose, and Juana Arana Cobos (2016). “Basque Studies and Beyond: A Brief Presentation of this Special Issue.” Bulletin of Hispanic Studies, 93: 1055-1063.
Pérez, Jorge (2016). “¿De qué hablamos cuando hablamos de Estudios Ibéricos?
Sobre los beneficios de un archivo cultural más amplio.” ALEC, 41(4): 265-281.
Pérez Isasi, Santiago (2017). “Los Estudios Ibéricos como estudios literarios:
algunas consideraciones teóricas y metodológicas.” In César Rina Simón (ed.), Procesos de nacionalización e identidades en la Península Ibérica (pp. 347-361). Cáceres: Universidad de Extremadura.
Pérez Isasi, Santiago, and Angela Fernandes (eds.) (2013). Looking at Iberia. A
Comparative European Perspective. Oxford: Peter Lang. Pinheiro, Teresa (2013). “Iberian and European studies – Archaeology of a New
Epistemological Field.” In Santiago Pérez Isasi, and Ângela Fernandes (eds.), Looking at Iberia. A Comparative European Perspective (pp. 27-41). Oxford: Peter Lang.
Puxan-Oliva, Marta (2016). “Frinctions of World Literature.” Informes del
Observatorio / Observatorio Reports IO/OR 020-04/2016EN. doi: 10.15427/OR0-20-04/2016SP.
Resina, Joan Ramon (1996). “Hispanism and its Discontents.” Siglo XX/20th
Century, 14: 85-135. Resina, Joan Ramon (2005). “Whose Hispanism? Cultural Trauma, Disciplined
Memory and Symbolic Dominance.” In Mabel Moraña (ed.), Ideologies of Hispanism (pp. 160-186). Nashville: Vanderbilt UP.
Resina, Joan Ramon (2009). Del hispanismo a los estudios ibéricos. Una
propuesta federativa para el ámbito cultural. Madrid: Biblioteca Nueva. Resina, Joan Ramon (ed.) (2013). Iberian Modalities. A Relational Approach to
the Study of Culture in the Iberian Peninsula. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press.
Rei-Doval, Gabriel. “Galician Studies in the United States.” Informes del
Observatorio / Observatorio Reports IO/OR 021-05/2016SP. doi: 10.15427/OR021-05/2016SP.
Sáez Delgado, Antonio (2015). Pessoa y España. Valencia: Pre-Textos. Sáez Delgado, Antonio, and Filipa Soares (eds.) (2016). Almada Negreiros en
Madrid. Madrid: Universidad Autónoma de Madrid. Santana, Mario (2008). “El hispanismo en los Estados Unidos y la ‘España
Santana, Mario (2013). “Implementing Iberian Studies: Some Paradigmatic and Curricular Changes.” In Joan Ramon Resina (ed.), Iberian Modalites. A Relational Approach to the Study of Culture in the Iberian Peninsula (pp. 54-61). Liverpool: Liverpool UP.
Santana, Mario (2016). “Presentación.” Pasavento. Revista de Estudios
Hispánicos, 4(1): 275-279. Wright, Roger (2010). “Bilingualism and Diglossia in Medieval Iberia (350-1350).”
In Fernando Cabo, Anxo Abuín, and César Domínguez (eds.), A Comparative History of Literatures in the Iberian Peninsula (pp. 333-350). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
Esther Gimeno Ugalde Boston College /
Research Member of the Centro de Estudos Comparatistas (Universidade de Lisboa)